Shift federal social programs to church, family, & community

I genuinely believed in forcing government to live within its means, cut unnecessary spending to the bone, eliminate social experiments and government "feel good" programs, and push more true charitable works to the family, the faith community, and to
the nonprofit sector. In the ideal world, there would be no need for any government effort to feed people, clothe people, house people, or restore the health of people, whether physical of mental. Families would take care of their own, and when the
burdens were overwhelming, their neighbors, church, and community would pitch in to take care of it. I still want that to be the goal of a society--to empower individuals, families, churches, and communities to assist people so that the role of
government is reduced to providing for a strong military that can secure our borders and give us the framework we can thrive in. Self-government flavored with the culture of life.

Recognizes what your decisions do to people at the bottom

Real leadership recognizes what your decisions do to people at the bottom. You can’t have a president who sees a whole bunch of the US as invisible. If you don’t understand how it affects the person all the way at the bottom, you’re not ready to lead.
Leadership is about seeing the whole field. Our Republican Party is going to be in trouble if we creating policies & acting like we don’t understand the feelings of those waiting the tables, handling bags, driving the trucks, & moving the freight around.

First Amendment never intended to shut out voices of faith

The First Amendment is often used illegitimately as a way to shut out the voice of faith in the public square when it was in fact intended to do the opposite. The first Amendment declares that “Congress shall pass no law which respects the establishment”
of a specific religion or prohibits the free exercise thereof. Essentially it can be defined in this simple summation: “Government is not to prohibit or prefer a particular religion or faith.”
It is not the government’s role, responsibility, or its right to prohibit the expression of one’s faith.

Those of us with faith know that government should guarantee that those expressions will not be prohibited.
At the same time, we should be warned that they will not be preferred over another in some official capacity.

The First Amendment was intended to ensure that the voice of government did not drown out the voices of faith.

Supports Charitable Choice for funding faith-based providers

Issued an executive order to state agencies recurring compliance with Charitable Choice, allowing faith-based providers access to government funds

Led the effort to pass the nation’s
third Covenant Marriage law

Led the effort to pass “A Woman’s Right to Know” legislation for women seeking abortion

Source: PAC website, HopeForAmericaPac.org, “About”
, Dec 1, 2006

Social service agencies can never replace the family

The family is the moral and institutional foundation upon which nearly all human relations are built. It is central to virtually every social endeavor from education to governance, from economics to spirituality, from the care of the aged to the
conserving of the earth. The family is the institution that is most effective in solving the problems of poverty, sickness, delinquency, and crisis.

No matter how benevolent, no matter how philanthropic, and no matter how altruistic a government social
service agency may be, it can never hope to match the personal intimacy of a family. There is no replacement for the close ties between family members.

And yet, we act as if the family is an unimportant entity and expect the government and its utopian
leanings to save our culture. But instead of helping matters, virtually every dollar poured into those programs has only made matters worse. The cure has turned out to be worse than the disease.

Reinstitute Puritan work ethic as American foundation

Our country was founded on a work ethic that motivated and inspired the worker who felt the double blessing of fulfilling his calling and providing for his family. Although such sentiment is no longer widely held, it merits reigniting:

A solid
work ethic affords us all a sense of dignity and purpose.

A solid work ethic enables us to care for our families, meet our responsibilities, and uphold our values in our communities.

A solid work ethic enables us to leave a legacy for future
generations. The emphasis on thrift, diligence, sacrifice, and focus, effectively disciplines future generations. They learn from our example, are inspired by our selflessness, and are blessed by our providence. The reason for American prosperity is not
accidental. It is the direct outgrowth of the Puritan work ethic, which involved diligent labor, saving, and the philosophy of free enterprise. We are enjoying the leftover moral capital of those faithful men and women who went before us.

Welfare should be conditioned upon work

Welfare that goes to able-bodied adults should be conditioned upon work and should be a temporary hand up instead of a permanent handout.
Let's remember that the burdens of teenage pregnancy should not fall only on the mother or the taxpayers. The father should be required to pay for doctor bills, diapers, and putting food on the table.

Source: Character IS the Issue, by Mike Huckabee, p.146
, Sep 9, 1997

Maintain TANF block grants.

Huckabee adopted a letter to Congressional leaders from 4 Governors:

With reauthorization of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program just around the corner, the nation’s Governors want to express our appreciation for your continued efforts in support of maintaining the fundamental flexibility and funding levels within TANF that are so critical to our efforts to reform the nation’s welfare system.

Governors are proud of the remarkable change and the level of state innovation that has taken place throughout the country as a result of the 1996 welfare reform law. Not only have welfare caseloads dropped dramatically, close to 50% nationwide, but more individuals are going to work and a greater number of families are becoming self-sufficient. Perhaps even more remarkable is the transition of the welfare system from one of cash payments to one of encouraging work and personal responsibility. Welfare offices are being transformed from check-cutting offices to comprehensive employment and support centers. Former eligibility workers are
taking on new responsibilities as mentors and job counselors.

None of this would have been possible, of course, without the flexibility and level of funding that was guaranteed in the TANF block grant. TANF provides states the flexibility to spend “welfare” funds on programs for low-income families far beyond basic cash assistance. [We attach an outline of reform examples] of programs that states are currently operating with their federal TANF and state maintenance-of-effort funds. While this is by no means a comprehensive list of all the programs currently in operation, it should give you a sense of the historic shift in culture that has taken place in state welfare agencies. In addition, we encourage you to get in touch with the Governor and state officials in your own state to find out more about their TANF programs.

We believe very strongly that states are moving in the right direction. We look forward to working with you as we move towards TANF reauthorization.

Maintain federal Social Services Block Grant funding.

Huckabee adopted the National Governors Association position paper:

The Issue

Despite an ongoing need to provide social services to families, the elderly, and the disabled, federal funding for the Social Services Block Grant (SSBG) has been cut dramatically over the past few years, indicating a weakening of the historic state-federal partnership to serve needy Americans. In 1996, as part of the historic welfare reform agreement, Congress agreed to provide the states $2.38 billion each year for SSBG. Since that time, funding has been chipped away little by little. This year, SSBG is funded at $1.725 billion.

NGA’s Position

The nation’s Governors have consistently supported the broad flexibility of the SSBG and are adamantly opposed to cuts in federal funding for the program. Governors believe that funding for SSBG is among the most valuable federal investment that can be made for the nation’s most vulnerable population.
Further cuts will be difficult for state and local governments to absorb and will cause a disruption in the delivery of the most critical human services. Governors believe that funding for SSBG should be restored to $2.38 billion, and transferability should be permanently restored to 10 percent, the levels that were agreed to as part of the 1996 welfare reform law.

In 1996, Governors reluctantly agreed to a slight reduction in funding for SSBG, from $2.8 billion to $2.38 billion, with the understanding that funding would remain at $2.38 billion through fiscal 2002, and then return to $2.8 billion. However, the federal government has consistently broken that promise. The nation’s Governors strongly urge Congress and the administration to reject the proposed cuts and to restore funding and flexibility to the program.

Maintain flexibility & funding levels for TANF block grants.

The Issue

The 1996 welfare reform law, including the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant, needs to be reauthorized before September 30, 2002.

NGA’s Position

In 1996, the Governors, Congress, and the administration entered into a historic welfare reform agreement. In exchange for assuming the risk involved with accepting the primary responsibility for transforming the welfare system from one of dependency to self-sufficiency, Governors agreed to guaranteed funding for the life of the TANF block grant along with significant flexibility to administer federal programs. The current NGA policy on welfare reform makes three key points:

Maintain flexibility. The TANF block grant was created so that states could develop innovative approaches to addressing welfare reform, and states have been successful in tailoring their programs to meet the individual needs of their citizens. This flexibility must be maintained so that states can
continue the progress of welfare reform.

Maintain investment. States are provided with $16.5 billion each year in federal TANF funds, which together with the required state maintenance-of-effort funds, finance welfare reform. Some will argue that the funding should be cut because of the dramatic drop in caseloads. But TANF is no longer just about cash assistance - states are now serving a much broader population than under the old welfare system, and states are now providing services to families that help them succeed and advance in the workplace, not just cutting a check for cash each month.

Move toward greater program alignment. The Food Stamp Program is one example of a program that is in great need of reform, and its connection to welfare reform should be discussed in the context of reauthorization. Other related programs that should be considered include child support, child welfare, housing, the Workforce Investment Act and Medicaid.

More federal funding for Low-income energy assistance.

Huckabee signed the Southern Governors' Association resolution:

Whereas, the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), created to assist low-income households in meeting their cooling and heating needs, provides less than 20 percent of the Nation’s eligible applicants with assistance and is distributed based on a formula that is weighted toward cold weather, with only 2.8 percent in FY95 being used for cooling needs;

Whereas, the Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP), a program designed to provide low-income households with energy efficient improvements, is underfunded and provides 10 times more funding to states with more heating assistance needs than states that have more cooling needs;

Whereas, sixteen southern states account for 43 percent of the low-income households in the United States and the majority of the southern states receive significantly less than the national average in the LIHEAP state gross allotments and WAP funding;

Resolved, that the Southern Governors’ Association urges Congress and the President to provide in any national energy policy increased funding for Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) to include a larger proportion of eligible low-income households while equitably addressing both cooling and heating needs.

Supports TANF grants to states.

Whereas, Congress reformed public assistance in 1996 with the creation of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program;

Whereas, included in this program were modest supplemental grants for 17 relatively poor or rapidly growing states;

Whereas, nine of the 17 qualifying states are from the South and receive 78.6% of the funding totaling $251 million;

Whereas, these grants that help southern states provide important services, such as child care, job training and placement, and transportation to low-income families; and

Whereas, authorization for these grants is set to expire at the end of the 2001 federal fiscal year; now, therefore, be it

Resolved, that the southern governors call upon Congress to extend for one year the TANF supplemental grants to the 17 identified states:

Resolved, that Congress should include in its 2002 TANF reauthorization bill provisions that will continue the supplemental grants for poor and fast growing states and use information from the 2000 census to identify any new states that meet the eligibility criteria; and

Resolved, that Congress should provide adequate funding if new states are identified as being eligible for the supplemental grants.